Criticism

Ben Affleck’s ‘Animals’ Flops with Tedious Plot and Lack of Style on Netflix

By Catriona Vale, Craft & Criticism EditorJanuary 16, 2024

Aiming for political intrigue, ‘Animals’ stalls in blandness, revealing itself as forgettable TV rather than a compelling feature.

Ben Affleck’s latest film, ‘Animals,’ is a textbook example of a Netflix thriller that’s more dull than daring. As a Los Angeles mayoral candidate embroiled in scandal, Affleck’s character Mark Kimball navigates a domestic kidnapping plot that feels both clichéd and undercooked. Despite Affleck’s natural charm and a cast including Kerry Washington and Gillian Anderson going full camp, the film’s script offers little substance or tension. It’s a film that looks like a late-night TV episode rather than a major streaming release, lacking visual flair or narrative momentum.

The film’s screenplay, credited to three writers including Affleck himself, struggles under the weight of improbable plot turns and clunky dialogue. The story hinges on a morally questionable scheme that, rather than gripping, comes off as contrived. Affleck’s performance, typically dependable, is hamstrung by a pedestrian direction that fails to elevate the material. Instead of a compelling political thriller, ‘Animals’ feels like a rushed product assembled in a studio factory, with no stylistic daring or creative vision to justify its big-screen aspirations. More context: Criticism.

Gillian Anderson’s turn as a campy, blond-vamped antagonist adds some life to the proceedings, but even her exaggerated performance cannot save the film’s overall boredom. Affleck’s attempt to flex his Spanish skills adds a slight flair, but it’s not enough to lift the film’s teetering narrative. The film’s production values are minimal, and it’s clear that ‘Animals’ was designed solely for Netflix’s streaming platform, where it will likely live or die based on viewer patience rather than storytelling quality.

The film’s visual presentation is uninspired, resembling a low-budget TV drama more than a feature film. It lacks the stylistic flourishes that might have made it stand out in a crowded streaming landscape. Instead, ‘Animals’ feels like a product of Netflix’s “assembly line” approach, with no distinctive voice or cinematic ambition. Ben Affleck, who has directed acclaimed films like ‘Argo’ and ‘The Town,’ seems to be caught in a rut here, perhaps persuaded by the studio to take a role that neither challenges nor excites him.

Below is a clip from the film that illustrates its flatness: the scene features Affleck’s character in a tense moment that falls flat due to poor editing and uninspired cinematography. It exemplifies how ‘Animals’ fails to capitalize on its premise or cast, ultimately delivering a forgettable experience for viewers expecting more from a filmmaker of Affleck’s caliber. As a streaming release, it’s unlikely to make much noise, serving only as a reminder of Netflix’s ongoing struggle to find consistent quality in its original movies.

CriticismIndie film